This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Mpe plus Telecon
p.1 #1Mpe plus Telecon
Alerted by Brian and Tom to the possibilities of the Mpe and teleconverter combination I thought that I would put the several telecons that I had in my "bits" box through their paces.
I tried each both forward facing and reversed and the results are listed below.
As the separation of the lenses will obviously effect performance I have noted the method of attachment in each case.
Steinheill 2X (M42) Forward facing
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 2.2X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 1.9X with WD of 80mm
Steinheill Reversed
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring & 52/42 reversing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.5X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 4X with WD of 12mm
Tamron 2X (Canon FD) Forward facing
Attachment: Handheld - no appropriate adapters to hand
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.5X
With Mpe @ 5X no focus possible
@ 4X no focus possible
@ 3X Mag. was 2X with WD of 20mm
Tamron Reversed
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring & 52/FD reversing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.5X
With Mpe @ 5X no focus possible
@ 4X Mag. was 2.4X with WD of 8mm
Teleplus 2X (Canon ef) Forward facing
Attachment: Handheld
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.2X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 4.5X with WD of 8mm
Teleplus Reversed
Attachment: Handheld
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.3X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 3.3X with WD of 22mm
Prinzflex 3X (M42) Forward facing
Attachment: 58/42 reducing ring
Didn't work - couldn't focus at any setting of Mpe.
Prinzflex Reversed
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring & 52/42 reversing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 2.2X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 3.7X with WD of 3mm
The Steinheill seems to be the best of the bunch. It is a neat little lens with a very convenient M42 mount and, in the forward facing position, gives a range of magnification which meshes nicely with the Mpe while maintaining a useful minimum working distance.
When I have a little more time I will check out the IQ
David
I tried each both forward facing and reversed and the results are listed below.
As the separation of the lenses will obviously effect performance I have noted the method of attachment in each case.
Steinheill 2X (M42) Forward facing
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 2.2X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 1.9X with WD of 80mm
Steinheill Reversed
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring & 52/42 reversing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.5X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 4X with WD of 12mm
Tamron 2X (Canon FD) Forward facing
Attachment: Handheld - no appropriate adapters to hand
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.5X
With Mpe @ 5X no focus possible
@ 4X no focus possible
@ 3X Mag. was 2X with WD of 20mm
Tamron Reversed
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring & 52/FD reversing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.5X
With Mpe @ 5X no focus possible
@ 4X Mag. was 2.4X with WD of 8mm
Teleplus 2X (Canon ef) Forward facing
Attachment: Handheld
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.2X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 4.5X with WD of 8mm
Teleplus Reversed
Attachment: Handheld
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 1.3X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 3.3X with WD of 22mm
Prinzflex 3X (M42) Forward facing
Attachment: 58/42 reducing ring
Didn't work - couldn't focus at any setting of Mpe.
Prinzflex Reversed
Attachment: 58/52 reducing ring & 52/42 reversing ring
Focus at infinity with Mpe set at approx. 2.2X
With Mpe @ 5X Mag. was 3.7X with WD of 3mm
The Steinheill seems to be the best of the bunch. It is a neat little lens with a very convenient M42 mount and, in the forward facing position, gives a range of magnification which meshes nicely with the Mpe while maintaining a useful minimum working distance.
When I have a little more time I will check out the IQ
David
Aug 09, 2010 at 02:05 PM
p.1 #2Mpe plus Telecon
Excellent David , I will create a MPE TC master thread so we can keep all this info together. Work on your IQ
If anyone (Matt MVers) has a Kenko TC we need for you to try it out and let use know what you find .
Tom
If anyone (Matt MVers) has a Kenko TC we need for you to try it out and let use know what you find .
Tom
Aug 09, 2010 at 02:14 PM
p.1 #5Mpe plus Telecon
There might be a little money to be made if a competent vendor would figure out which of these pre-existing TCs could still be manufactured inexpensively and sold to MPE users. Probably not enough volume in it for Canon, especially since Nikon isn't competing in the high-mag macro lens arena. Maybe Sigma or Tamron will take up the challenge? If such an MPE attachment could be designed with an MT-24 flash attachment ring. Even a standard screw-thread filter attachment should work fine since one can buy extra flash attachment rings and simply screw the thing onto the front-mounted TC's (hypothetical) filter attachment threads.
Aug 10, 2010 at 03:32 PM
p.1 #6Mpe plus Telecon
Not bad at all - getting the idea from this and other info that it is only 2X TCs that seem to work well.
Brian v.
Brian v.
Aug 23, 2010 at 03:02 PM
p.1 #7Mpe plus Telecon
Canon should just make a wide-angle converter for the MP-E. They can call it the "unmacrofier." 
Aug 23, 2010 at 03:11 PM
p.1 #8Mpe plus Telecon
We all knew, going in, what the MP-E was/is. Reminds me again to give a special nod to Brian, Tom and others who have done a lot of shooting with this new combo. I'll say it again: lotsa flexibility, lotsa potential.
Kenny
Kenny
Aug 23, 2010 at 03:51 PM
p.1 #9Mpe plus Telecon
There are several companies already making WA converters. Raynox is one that comes to mind. I have some of their TCs that screw in to the front of P&S cameras and they work fairly well. Has anyone tried using some already existing converters.
Just as an aside I suspect IQ is fairly dependent on how well the TC or WAC is attached to the lens. I noticed a huge difference in IQ with my Vivitar after I "adjusted" it in the rubber tube (from Lowe's plumbing dept). I am still waiting for my step rings for more testing.
Here is the Raynox link, but there are plenty of other WAC sources.
http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/egindex.htm
Just as an aside I suspect IQ is fairly dependent on how well the TC or WAC is attached to the lens. I noticed a huge difference in IQ with my Vivitar after I "adjusted" it in the rubber tube (from Lowe's plumbing dept). I am still waiting for my step rings for more testing.
Here is the Raynox link, but there are plenty of other WAC sources.
http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/egindex.htm
Aug 23, 2010 at 03:52 PM
p.1 #10Mpe plus Telecon
David thank for the follow up with the pics this will help other figure out what they want.
Aug 23, 2010 at 06:28 PM
p.1 #11Mpe plus Telecon
I don't really understand the desire to add a teleconverter on the front of an MP-E to achieve infinity focus. Wouldn't it just be easier to buy a 50mm lens and haul that around? A 50mm isn't going to really be massively bigger than a TC, especially in terms of weight and carry space, and if you have to use some contraption to mount it to the front and all, is it really any more difficult to change lenses to the 50?
Can someone help me out? Are you just experimenting to experiment, or is there some need you are trying to fill that I'm not understanding?
Can someone help me out? Are you just experimenting to experiment, or is there some need you are trying to fill that I'm not understanding?
Aug 23, 2010 at 09:40 PM
p.1 #12Mpe plus Telecon
My impression is that it's not just about infinity focus--it's about having a long focusing range, from infinity to magnifications greater than 1:1. The bonus is that the TC screws onto the front, so you don't have to expose the mirror box. In effect, with two lenses, one of which you never have to dismount, you have infinity all the way to 5:1. That's the appeal, I would think.
Aug 23, 2010 at 09:52 PM
p.1 #13Mpe plus Telecon
ragebot wrote:
There are several companies already making WA converters. Raynox is one that comes to mind. I have some of their TCs that screw in to the front of P&S cameras and they work fairly well. Has anyone tried using some already existing converters.
Just as an aside I suspect IQ is fairly dependent on how well the TC or WAC is attached to the lens. I noticed a huge difference in IQ with my Vivitar after I "adjusted" it in the rubber tube (from Lowe's plumbing dept). I am still waiting for my step rings for more testing.
Here is the Raynox...Show more →
Ragebot i actually purchased a wide angle converter (Raynox .66X) to try on the front of the MPE-65 and I could not achieve any focus. It was actually my annoyance at this that prompted me to try the TC on the front and was very suprised when it worked.
Brian v.
There are several companies already making WA converters. Raynox is one that comes to mind. I have some of their TCs that screw in to the front of P&S cameras and they work fairly well. Has anyone tried using some already existing converters.
Just as an aside I suspect IQ is fairly dependent on how well the TC or WAC is attached to the lens. I noticed a huge difference in IQ with my Vivitar after I "adjusted" it in the rubber tube (from Lowe's plumbing dept). I am still waiting for my step rings for more testing.
Here is the Raynox...Show more →
Ragebot i actually purchased a wide angle converter (Raynox .66X) to try on the front of the MPE-65 and I could not achieve any focus. It was actually my annoyance at this that prompted me to try the TC on the front and was very suprised when it worked.
Brian v.
Aug 24, 2010 at 12:42 AM
p.1 #14Mpe plus Telecon
Catfur wrote:
...Are you just experimenting to experiment, or is there some need you are trying to fill that I'm not understanding?
A twist of the wrist and you are shooting natively with one of the best macro lenses available, including the ability to shoot from lifesize to 5 times lifesize. Difficult to do that with a bare 50mm or any other focal length lens.
All that said, there's a certain amount of futzing around for futzing arounds' sake. At least, on my part.
Kenny
...Are you just experimenting to experiment, or is there some need you are trying to fill that I'm not understanding?
A twist of the wrist and you are shooting natively with one of the best macro lenses available, including the ability to shoot from lifesize to 5 times lifesize. Difficult to do that with a bare 50mm or any other focal length lens.
All that said, there's a certain amount of futzing around for futzing arounds' sake. At least, on my part.
Kenny
Aug 24, 2010 at 08:09 AM
p.1 #15Mpe plus Telecon
Speaking about my own needs,using a FF camera body, I still have a need to quickly switch to a lower magnification macro/close-up lens. Larger butterflies in particular are frustrating to me - they show up very quickly and are often larger than the 25-35 mm max practical size the native MPE can capture at its lowest magnification.
As much as I enjoy the 5x maximum magnification, I would gladly swap the 1x to 5x magnification range of the MPE for something like an 0.5x to 4x magnification range.
As much as I enjoy the 5x maximum magnification, I would gladly swap the 1x to 5x magnification range of the MPE for something like an 0.5x to 4x magnification range.
Aug 24, 2010 at 09:33 AM
p.1 #16Mpe plus Telecon
I have been reading - trying to figure out stuff . Finally found this thread , down to this one - what - 6 more to read .
Anyway , I want the DOF and the macro for flowers . If stamain is in focus the petals aren't . Sometimes I want the veining in leaves , flower petals or just the texture of stem .
XTI - gripped , Canon - efs 10-22 , efs 17-55 , efs 18-55 IS , 28-90 , 28 @ 2.8 , 50 @1.8 , 28-135 IS , 35-350L , Quantaray lens 70-300 macro , life size converter , KSM filters for all , 580 II , 380 , OC-E3 . , 4 bogen tripods , 2 bogen monopods , cane pod window mount , several rails , kenko auto tubes life size converter , KSM filters for all , 580 II , 380 , OC-E3 . , 4 bogen tripods , 2 bogen monopods , cane pod window mount , several rails , kenko auto tubes .
misc manual lens
Thanks for info .
Edited on Nov 02, 2010 at 01:55 PM · View previous versions
Anyway , I want the DOF and the macro for flowers . If stamain is in focus the petals aren't . Sometimes I want the veining in leaves , flower petals or just the texture of stem .
XTI - gripped , Canon - efs 10-22 , efs 17-55 , efs 18-55 IS , 28-90 , 28 @ 2.8 , 50 @1.8 , 28-135 IS , 35-350L , Quantaray lens 70-300 macro , life size converter , KSM filters for all , 580 II , 380 , OC-E3 . , 4 bogen tripods , 2 bogen monopods , cane pod window mount , several rails , kenko auto tubes life size converter , KSM filters for all , 580 II , 380 , OC-E3 . , 4 bogen tripods , 2 bogen monopods , cane pod window mount , several rails , kenko auto tubes .
misc manual lens
Thanks for info .
Edited on Nov 02, 2010 at 01:55 PM · View previous versions
Nov 01, 2010 at 01:08 PM
p.1 #17Mpe plus Telecon
Roy - not sure anyone would recommend this odd combo of MPE-65 with 2XTC as a starting combo to achieve what you could actually do with a normal 1:1 macro prime lens. It's just for emergency purposes as the MPE-65 normally has a minimum magnification of 1:1.
Not sure what question you are asking here ?
The DOF in macro is just dependant on the aperture and the magnification of the system whatever lens system you are using.
Brian V.
Not sure what question you are asking here ?
The DOF in macro is just dependant on the aperture and the magnification of the system whatever lens system you are using.
Brian V.
Nov 02, 2010 at 12:45 AM
p.1 #18Mpe plus Telecon
I just found email notification -
Anyway I can't find the post a poicture .
Even at f 32 , the DOF is to shallow for me .
I shoot raw +jpeg and clean up shots in CS3 extended
An example would be the wooly looking stuff on catus . If you look , the throns are not sharp . [ the wooly stuff is the begining of a catus apple , pear , tuna - whatever you want to call it - it's a seed pod forming ] [ 5076 , 77 ]
If you look at the white flower , the bugs inide and fence are blurred . [ 5079 , 80 ]
I just remember I had a flicker account so I am posting there . I hpoe this is right . You can look under catus for above , or flowers for general idea .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony-evelia/
Anyway I can't find the post a poicture .
Even at f 32 , the DOF is to shallow for me .
I shoot raw +jpeg and clean up shots in CS3 extended
An example would be the wooly looking stuff on catus . If you look , the throns are not sharp . [ the wooly stuff is the begining of a catus apple , pear , tuna - whatever you want to call it - it's a seed pod forming ] [ 5076 , 77 ]
If you look at the white flower , the bugs inide and fence are blurred . [ 5079 , 80 ]
I just remember I had a flicker account so I am posting there . I hpoe this is right . You can look under catus for above , or flowers for general idea .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony-evelia/
Nov 02, 2010 at 02:44 PM